Ruling On Animations And Cartoons (Dr. Bilal Philips)

Australian Islamic Library (www.australianislamiclibrary.org)

Ruling on Cartoons and Children books with

Images

Dr. Bilal Philips

AUSTRALIAN ISLAMIC LIBRARY

www.australianislamiclibrary.org

www.facebook.com/australianislamiclibrary


[O You who Believe, fear Allah. And let every soul look to what it has sent on for tomorrow. Fear Allah, surely Allah is well-acquainted with what you do. And do not be like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget their own souls. Such are the rebellious transgressors.]

(Al-Hashr 59:18-19)

Please help us reach out to all Muslims across the globe with essential Islamic knowledge. Help grow our not-for-

profit online Islamic books library.

Australian Islamic Library

www.australianislamiclibrary.org www.facebook.com/australianislamiclibrary


Foreword:

These days, images and cartoon characters are very

commonly found in almost all educational books including

Islamic studies curriculum. There are also Islamic animated

movies in the market.

All this leave many with a question on permissibility of

using images and animations in books and movie for

educational and religious purposes.

Considering these questions, Dr. Bilal Philips has included

the Fatwaa on the use of images for children at the back of

Eemaan Reading Series brochure. This booklet is a

reproduction of that fatwa for use by greater audience.


It is reported that:

Aaishah R.A. said,

I used to play with dolls in the presence of the Prophet

salallahualahi wa sallam, and my girlfriends used to play

along with me. Whenever, Allaahs Messenger

salallahualahi wa sallam would enter, they would hide from

him. So he called them to play with me. [1]

In the classical commentary on Saheeh al-Bukhaare

entitled Fat-h al-Baaree, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaanee wrote the

following:

This hadeeth is used as evidence for the permissibility of

making dolls and toys with human and animal forms for the

purpose of girls playing with them. This category has been

specifically excluded from the general prohibition against

making images.


Iyaad [2] stated this to be categorically so and related that

it was the position of the majority of scholars. He further

related that they permitted the selling of toys for girls in

order to train them from their youth in their household

affairs and in dealing with their children. [3]

Ibn Hibbaan entitled a chapter in his Saheeh : The

Permissibility for Children and Women to Play with Toys

and another: A Mans Giving Permission to His Wife to

Play with Dolls, however, his not limiting the permission to

child-wives, is a questionable position.[4]

Aboo Daawood and an-Nasaaee collected this hadeeth in

another chain from Aaishah R.A. in which she said,

When Allaahs Messenger (pbuh) arrived after the

expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar, the wind raised an end of a

curtain which hung in front of my closet, revealing some

dolls which belonged to me. He asked me, What is this? I

replied: My dolls. He saw among them a horse made of

wrapped cloth with wings, and asked, What is this I am

seeing among them? I replied: A horse. He asked, A horse

with wings? I replied: Have you not heard that Solomon

had horses with wings? Allaahs Messenger (pbuh) laughed

so heartily that I could see his molar teeth.[5]


This hadeeth is very clear that the meaning of playthings

(luab) mentioned in the earlier narration does not refer to

humans.

Al-Khattaabee [6] stated that this hadeeth indicates that

playing with dolls is not like playing with other images

which were warned about. And permission was given to

Aaishah R.A. regarding them because she was not mature at

the time.

Al-Khattaabees categorical statement that Aaishah R.A.

was not mature at the time is questionable, however, it is a

possibility. Aaishah R.A. was close to fourteen or past

fourteen at the time of the Battle of Khaybar. As regards the

time of the Battle of Tabuk, she had definitely reached

maturity by then. Thus, the narrations of this hadeeth which

mentioned Khaybar are more likely correct and they agree

with al-Khattaabees opinion, which is more preferable than

the contradictions (inherent in those which mention

Tabuk).[7]

The companion Ar-Rubayya bint Muawwath R.A. related

that the Prophet (pbuh) sent a messenger to the village of the

Ansaar on the morning of the day of Aashooraa (10th

Muharram) to announce that whoever had already eaten

should not eat any more and fast the rest of the day; and

whoever was already fasting should complete the fast. She

went on to say, Since then, we used to fast on that day (10th

Muharram) and also make the children fast. We would make


toys figures out of wool for them, and if any of them cried

for food, he would be given one until it was time to break

the fast.[8]

The Islaamic magazine, al-Usrah, published Saudi Arabia

grappled with the issue of figurative illustrations when they

decided to launch a magazine especially targeted towards

children. They wanted to provide an alternative to what was

present in the marketplace, which had little Islaamic content

and was introducing some un-Islaamic values to their

readers. They noticed that every single magazine for

children printed in the Arab world as well as in the west was

filled with illustrations of children, animals, etc. The reality

is that colorful drawings are something that children are

attracted to. If given the choice between reading a text with

pictures and a text without them, they will always choose

the illustrated text. The editors of al-Usrah thought of trying

to address this situation by using drawings of inanimate

objects with features added to make them look like live

characters, but they decided that technique was too limited

to use for the whole magazine.

In researching the Shareeah issues related to the drawing

of living creatures, they reached the following conclusions:

The basic rule regarding figurative illustrations is that

they are haraam.

The reason for the prohibition is that it involves imitation

of Allaahs attributes of Creator and Bestower of Forms, in


addition to the role of images in paving the way for shirk by

magnifying the greatness of the illustrated beings, which

leads to their being worshipped.

There is an exception to the general prohibition for

childrens toys, as is specifically indicated in hadeeth texts,

due to the fact that the main reason for the prohibition is not

present and that there is a tangible benefit, worthy of

consideration, in their use.

This exception to the prohibition of image-making is also

applicable to whatever represents a tangible benefit, given

consideration by the Shareeah, or prevents or removes an

expected harm, whether in the fields of education, public

safety or other areas.

Pictures drawn specially for children enter into the

exception, by analogy with childrens dolls and toys, on the

one hand, and in order to realize the benefits recognized by

the Shareeah and due to the pressing need for them in

contemporary childrens stories, on the other hand.

In this regard, Shaykh Naasiruddeen al-Albaanee stated

in his book, Adaab az-Zafaaf:

These two hadeeths (the hadeeth of Aaishah R.A.s dolls

and the hadeeth about the sahaabahs practice of giving

their fasting children toy figures to distract them from their


hunger) indicate the permissibility of creating images and

of owning them when there is an educational benefit in

doing so, one that will help in the cultivation and

development of the personality. Whatever else is of benefit

to the Muslims and Islam may be included in the same

ruling of permissibility of picture making and use, but

everything beside that remains under the basic

prohibition. [p. 196]

In the same vein, Shaykh Abdullaah ibn Jibreen (member

of the Committee of Leading Scholars, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia)

responded to a long, detailed question on image-making put

to him by the editors of al-Usrah magazine by saying,

I have considered what has been mentioned in the

question concerning the temptations and deviations to

which Muslim youths are being exposed both within and

without the lands of the Muslims in the form of films and

magazines, which are (so widespread as to be virtually)

unavoidable, which have filled the Muslims houses and

palaces, and which cause Muslim children to imitate what

they see and hear and read in them in their speech and

actions, the contents of which are frequently evil and

corrupt. [After weighing these factors,] I say: When an


alternative exists to engage children and youth which is

free, or relatively free, from such corrupt ideas and values, I

see it as permissible, because among the basic principles of

the Shareeah is choosing the lesser of two evils in order to

avoid the greater harm. Without any doubt, for Muslim

children to be busy in reading Islaamic magazines that

include some pictures used to make ideas clearer is less

serious than their habitual viewing of movies and picture

(magazines) that ruin their morals, pervert their innocence

and divert them away from good. That is what is apparent

to me, and Allaah knows best.

Shaykh Abdul Azeez al-Qaari (Imaam of Masjid Qubaa

and professor of tafseer and Quranic recitation at the Islamic

University of Madeenah) had this to say about image-

making in al-Usrah:

Regarding the hadeeth of Aaishah R.A. that she played

with dolls in the presence of the Prophet (pbuh), and, in

some versions of the hadeeth, that one of the dolls was in

the shape of a winged horse, and that when the Prophet

(pbuh) asked her about it, she replied, Didnt you hear that

[Prophet] Sulayman had a horse with wings? to which the

Prophet (pbuh) responded by laughing; this hadeeth

indicates the permissibility of childrens figurative toys,

owning them and using them, whether they are clearly


representative or not, and whether skillfully or crudely

fashioned. There is no basis in the hadeeth for making a

distinction. Those who say that Aaishah R.A.s dolls were

not distinctly representative have made an arbitrary

judgement not based on any evidence. What do they say

about a winged horse?

The variation in the texts on this subject, from severe

threats of punishment to less severe threats and from the

prohibition of the use of images to allowing their use,

indicates that the law revolves around the consideration of

the accompanying benefit and harm. If the law was fixed on

prohibition, far be it for the Prophet (pbuh) to allow Aaishah

R.A. to play with those dolls and that horse, all of which

were three-dimensional images. From that we know that the

rule is connected to benefit and harm. If the harm involved

is dominant, as in the case of idols and statues worshipped

in place of Allaah, or in the case of pictures of important or

pious people hung on walls as a sign of respect, which is a

major avenue leading to shirk, the rule is prohibition.

On the other hand, if the benefit is clearly dominant, as in

the case of childrens toys, or images on rugs or pillows, etc.,

which are put to use without respect, then the rule is

permissibility. Childrens magazines, books and stories take

the same ruling as childrens toys and dolls, since the benefit

in toys and dolls is no clearer than that in these other

(educational) media.


Footnotes

Sahih Al Bukhari, vol.8, p 95. no.151 and Sahih Muslim, vol.

4, p.1299, no. 5981. See also Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 3,

p.1373, no. 4913.

Al-Qaadee Iyaad (1084-1149CE) was a Moroccan scholar

who was among the leading scholars of hadeeth of his time.

Ibn Hajar stated here that some scholars like Ibn Battaal,

held that the hadeeth of Aaishah R.A. was abrogated and

that Ibn Abee Zayd related that Maalik disliked that a man

purchase dolls for his daughter. Consequently, ad-

Daawoodee also concluded that the hadeeth was most likely

abrogated. Fat-h al-Baaree, vol. 10, p. 544.Ibn Hajar added

here that al-Bayhaqee, after narrating this hadeeth stated

that the prohibition against making images is undeniable /

unshakeable, therefore this permission to Aaishah R.A.

should be considered as having taken place before the

prohibition. Ibn al-Jawzee categorically held that this was

the correct position. Al-Munthiree stated that if the toys

were image-like, the permission to Aaishah R.A. must have

been before the prohibition. Otherwise, playthings without

images may also be called toys / dolls. Al-Haleemee stated

categorically that if the toy has an image like an idol, it is not

permissible, otherwise it is permissible. After quoting ad-

Daawoodee as saying that al-laib bi al-banaat meant playing

with young girls and that bi here meant maa (along with),

Ibn at-Teen thoroughly refuted him. [Ibn Hajar went on to


say that] the narration of Ibn Uyaynah related in al-Jaami

from Hishaam ibn Urwah and some young girls used to

come and play with them along with me, and that of Jareer

from Hishaam I used to play with dolls (al-banaat), and

they were toys, collected by Aboo Awaanah and others

also refutes ad-Daawoodee. Fat-h al-Baaree, vol. 10, p.

544.Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 3, p. 1373, no.4914 and

authenticated in Saheeh Sunan Abee Daawood, vol. 3, p. 932,

no. 4123.

Hamd ibn Muhammad al-Khattaab (931-998 CE) was an

Afghani scholar of Fiqh and hadeeth well known for his

commentery on Sunan Abee Daawood called Maaalim as-

Sunan, a commentery on Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, and a

hadeeth dictionary called Ghareeb al-Hadith.Fat-h al-Baaree,

vol.10. pp. 543-4.

Sahih Al Bukhari, vol.3, pp. 103.4. no. 181.


NOTES


Fatwa by:

Sheikh Sa`d al-Funaysn

(Former Dean of Islamic Law,

Al-Imm Saud Islamic University,

Saudi Arabia)

Today there are a number of Islamic illustrated books and animated cartoons on the market for children. Due to the prohibition of image making in Islamic Law, people have differing opinions about how to approach these media.

Animated cartoons are, when referred to the corpus of

Islamic Law, a recent development. Therefore, we do not find it being addressed in the classical Islamic legal literature, though we occasionally find what could give us an indication of its ruling.

Before exploring the Islamic ruling for animated cartoons,

we must first discuss the ruling for drawing pictures. With respect to depicting human and animal life, scholars

of Islamic Law present a spectrum of opinion, running the gamut from those who view all image-making to be lawful to those who categorically prohibit all drawings of animal life.

The First Opinion:


Some scholars hold the view that image making is

essentially lawful. It is permissible to make two-dimensional illustrations as well as three-dimensional statues. The scholars who hold this view argue that the texts that prohibit image making are to be understood in the context of the state the people were in at the advent of Islam. The people had just emerged from the times of ignorance and from idolatry. After people became distanced from the worship of images, the prohibition was no longer necessary. This is why we see in some history books that when the Muslims opened up the lands of the Persians and Romans, they did not interfere with the pictures and statues found there.

The Second Opinion: Some scholars hold the view that all images are unlawful,

make two-dimensional illustrations as well as three-dimensional statues. They base their argument on the apparent meaning of a number of texts. These include the following:

`Aishah R.A. relates that the Prophet (peace be upon him)

said: The people who will be most severely punished on the

Day of Resurrection will be those who aspire to create like Allah. [Sahh al-Bukhr (5954) and Sahh Muslim (2107)]

Ibn ``Abbs R.A. relates that the Prophet (peace be upon

him) said: Every image maker is in the Fire. For each image

he made, a being will be fashioned to torment him in Hell. [Sahh al-Bukhr (2225) and Sahh Muslim (2110) The wording accords with al-Bukhr]


Ab Talhah R.A. relates that the Prophet (peace be upon

him) said: The angels do not enter a house wherein there is

a dog or images representing (people or animals). [Sahh al-Bukhr (3225) and Sahh Muslim (2106)]

The Third Opinion: Other scholars hold a view that is intermediate between

the former two. They argue that only three-dimensional images are prohibited. Those are the images being referred to by hadth like Every image maker is in the Fire. They argue that only the manufacture of three-dimensional images can possibly be described as aspiring to create like

Allah. Moreover, statues and not illustrations are the objects that

people are most likely to take as objects of worship. The drawings and illustrations to be found on cloth, on

paper, and decorating walls are, therefore, not objectionable. After considering all of the evidence, the opinion that

appears to be the strongest of the three is the last opinion. The reasons why it is the strongest opinion are as follows:

1. The question of a person aspiring to create like Allah is

really a question of that persons intent. It is an action of the heart and it is tantamount to unbelief. A person who acts with such intent is in a state of unbelief, regardless of whether he is making replicas of animals or of inanimate objects like trees, rocks, rivers, or mountains.


This is the reason for the prohibition against the image

making in the hadth. This is the reason why the image makers are being cursed. This is clarified by another hadth where the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Allah says:

Who does a greater wrong than one who aspires to creates as I create a grain of corn, a seed, or a barleycorn? [Sahh al-Bukhr (7559) and Sahh Muslim (2111) The wording accords with al-Bukhr]

Therefore, if the reason for the prohibition is that of

aspiring to create like Allah creates, then the subject matter is irrelevant. It makes no difference if the image is that of an animal or an inanimate object.

2. The manufacture of statuary is unlawful because this

activity is only carried out in order to aggrandize the subject. Such aggrandizement poses a danger of veneration and worship. The same can be said for photographs of prominent people when those photographs are erected high up in prominent places to be honored. In this case, such pictures become most certainly unlawful.

The story of Noah (A.S.) s people and how their making

of statues in commemoration of their pious forebears led to their idolatry is clear proof of this danger. In our day and age, we see the pictures of many people displayed in public places for the purpose of false veneration.

When we look at the generality of the statement Every

image maker is in the Fire such a general statement cannot literally apply except to a great sin. This sin is that of


willfully and intentionally aspiring to create like Allah. The word every that begins this sentence is the strongest word

for indicating generality. Since it is then annexed to the indefinite noun image maker it linguistically indicates that

generality is intended. The sentence is similar in structure to Allahs words: Every soul shall taste of death. [Srah Al

`Imrn: 185] When we look at the phrase those who aspire to create

like Allah the term aspire here indicates a challenge. It means that these image makers are fashioning images in order to imitate Allahs creative abilities and to present a

challenge to Allah. We see in another hadth related by Ibn `Abbs R.A. that

the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Those people who

make these images in this world will be punished on Day of Resurrection. They will be commanded to breathe life into what they had created. [Sahh al-Bukhr (5951) and Sahh Mulsim (2108)]

This specifies for us the meaning of Every image maker

is in the Fire and the other hadth mentioned above. All of the hadth about image making refer to the intent of image maker to aspire to create like Allah.

We find in the texts mention of many other major sins that

are certainly worse that the making of images like adultery, taking usury, and abusing parents without it being declared that the perpetrators of those sins are consigned to the Fire, like we find in Every image maker is

in the Fire. This should make it even clearer to us that those


who make images without the intention of aspiring to create like Allah are not included in the generality of the hadths

meaning. Rather, the hadth applies to all of those who have the intention of aspiring to create like Allah.

3. If we look at the statements of the Pious Predecessors,

we can see that they understood the texts about image making to be merely a severe warning against what is sinful rather than a direct prohibition. For instance, when a man who was a professional image maker came to Ibn Àbbs R.A. asking him for a ruling, Ibn Àbbs merely said: If you have to do so, then make images of trees and of that which has no soul. [Sahh al-Bukhr (2225) and Sahh Muslim (2110)]

Ibn Àbbs R.A. was neither harsh with him nor did he

make any categorical statement. He said nothing more than that. We find that the Pious Predecessors generally made statements about image making that indicated nothing more than pious reserve and avoiding that which can lead to deviance.

4. Many types of images produced today are meant for

education and can hardly be dispensed with. One pictorial representation can often suffice for hundreds of words.

We can see that Àishah R..A. used to play with dolls,

and they were three-dimensional images. Such toys are permitted by the sacred texts. Scholars explain this permissibility by saying that the purpose behind such images is one of instruction and educational play.


The ruling, then, applies to the general cause and not to the particular instance that illustrates this cause. If three-dimensional figures are permitted for children for education and constructive play, then it is even more appropriate that such images be permitted for adults, since adults are required to learn a far greater range of more difficult and critical skills.

In todays world, images especially two-dimensional

images are indispensable for people to carry out the necessary activities of life. The ruling that such images are permissible is in harmony with the general ease and facility of Islamic Law. Allah says: Allah wants to make things easy

for you, and he does not want things to be difficult for you.

[Srah al-Baqarah: 185] From all of this, I hold that the pictures used to make

cartoon movies are among the images that are permissible to produce and Allah knows best. Consequently the sale, purchase, and viewing of cartoons is also permitted as long as all of these activities are engaged in according to the dictates of Islamic Law. The cartoons should have appropriate content and be used in an appropriate manner. They should be free from falsehood and immorality.

Indeed, the production, distribution, and showing of

Islamic animated cartoons that accord to Islamic teachings are ways by which a Muslim can seek Allahs reward.

And Allah knows best. I ask Allah to guide us to what is right.

Documents

Ruling On Animations And Cartoons (Dr. Bilal Philips)